YouTube - Ron Paul on CNN American Morning 4/15/09: Legalizing Marijuana

What do you good folks think? I know we have some scientists and doctors here. But I think Dr. Paul is spot on. I think the war on drugs is a failure and is taking up too many resources without even denting the problem. By legalising you get rid of the drug lords and you can provide a clear and clean alternative. Of course, it's not that drug-taking should be encouraged, but that if you can control it you are much more likely to defeat it. It's a social ill and people have to educate each other. By banning it, much like the Prohibition era, you are just inviting a crap-load of side problems.

I agree with legalisation and the argument in favour makes a lot of sense. They are talking about Marijuana but I think it should be extended to harder drugs as well.

But the problem is not the logic of it. The problem is that no government would ever dare do such a thing because most societies are not ready for this and the public won't accept it. There will be an uproar. It will take time for the majority to come around to the fact that legalisation is the way ahead to fight drug problems.

And for this reason, no aspiring politician would put his political life on the line by suggesting such a thing. Don't look at Ron Paul, he has had his political career and can say what he wants without fearing it will be jeoperdised. He is not running for any office where he needs votes.

Well, I live in Holland and here its allowed or better yet tolerated, it isnt completly legal but cops will looks past it, you'r allowed to have upto 5 plants (or max 30 gram) in your home and coffee shops are allowed to sell upto 5 grams per day per person. Its called "gedoog beleid" and it doesnt have really good translation other than tolerating policy but tht might not cover it.

I didnt watch the vid yet.

Behrooz jan, Paul ran on this issue for the Presidency in the previous election. I am not sure also that the people are necessarily in the way of the government. I think the otherway around actually. When people know better, they'll choose better. Government itself is the prime perpetrator of misconstruing facts and fear-mongering. I also think drug cartels are refined enough now to lobby FOR the war on drugs through the system itself. Because, it's to their benefit that it remains illegal.

Kaz, are you saying Ron Paul argued for legalisation of cocain and heroin as well, what before the elections!!!?

Kaz, are you saying Ron Paul argued for legalisation of cocain and heroin as well, what before the elections!!!?

Yes. His stance is legalisation of all drugs, I believe. He's been arguing this for decades. Paul is what you would call unique: a politician with a spine and integrity.

It's really tough to legalize recreational drugs...

It's not that there is a lack of interest from the public - 18% of Canadians over the age of 15 for example, have tried Cannabis and I've seen numbers as high as 1/3 of those over the age of 30 (i.e. comes pretty close to 50% of the voting public doesn't it?)

It's definitely not that it's as harmful to the public or the fabric of society as the goverments often claim. Over 50 people a year in Canada die from over-the-couter cough medication (completely regulated in production) for example, whereas a total of 5 or 6 deaths in the last 10 years have been linked to Ecstacy (in all but one instance due to dehydration or secondary factors and in that one instance Ecstacy as the only drug present was ruled out!).

It's not even the fact that the governments have problems legalizing something that is harmful. Methadone is one of the most addictive substances ever created and most users will confirm that if they ever had a chance of ending their Heroin addiction, it is practically impossible to reverse a Methadone addiction. Yet, it's easily administered by a prescription at many pharmacists across Canada. As are sleeping pills and Prozac which are much more addictive than Mushrooms for example.

It's not even that our leaders argue against the fact that every adult should have the choice to endeavour responsibly in the pursuit of happiness. Both of the last 2 Amercian presidents have admitted openly to using drugs. Almost every good piece of music you listen to, most of the good literature ever written, some of the greatest paintings of all time, some of the best phlosophical thoughts and even modern Psychology are all compliments of altered states of minds and recreational drugs.

So, what's good for the Goose is apparently not good for the Gander. But why? The reason is very very simple. Interest groups and strong lobbying from Pharmaceutical companies. Cannabis is one of the easiest and least expensive medications to produce. No patent is required, no huge investment or investors are needed so set-up production, etc. The same goes for something like MDMA (Ecstacy). A single 100 mg dose of MDMA would save individuals from spending thousands of dollars on everything from anti-depressants, sleeping pills and in some instances even pain killers and cancer medication. A pill that costs less the $2 to produce and whose patent ran out over 80 years ago will cost large pharmaceutical companies $1,000's of dollars in the long run.

That's the real reason and the only reason, those who want access to these substances are given access to it and the general public will have to watch commercials on TV from 1001 pharmacetical companies. At times on American TV, one out of 3 ads is from a pharmaceutical company. The fabrics of capitalism will never be allowed to unravel by a $2 pill. That's the sad truth.

It's really tough to legalize recreational drugs...At times on American TV, one out of 3 ads is from a pharmaceutical company. The fabrics of capitalism will never be allowed to unravel by a $2 pill. That's the sad truth.

I'll have a real hard time accepting recreational drugs ever becoming legal. Other than weed (pot, marijuvana), I do not ever want to see anything specially designer drugs to ever be legalized.

I do know how pharmaceutical companies have been sticking it to us over the years. One thing that really puzzles my wife and I everytime we see a TV commertial introducing some new drug. It is beyound comprehension that average person that can't even pick the better potatoe chip, is presented with information that could have serious health implications.

Those commertials should be stopped by FDA or some government agency.

Well, there's different levels of legalization Hamid jaan. I certainly wouldn't want any of them to be sold in a corner store - although, I feel that there's less potential for abuse for quite a few of them than alcohol or cigarettes. Frankly, I'm even against Apririn being sold in a corner store and being used (abused) as candy by some people.

Having said that, I see absolutely nothing wrong with somone having the choice between Cannabis as an effective and natural medication for Arthirtis or something synthesized like Methotrexate, without having to worry about the categorization of Cannabis as a "drug".

I also see nothing wrong with a substance like MDMA being prescribed by a doctor, no differently than any sleep medication is. Contrary to common belief, MDMA is not a designer drug and was invented and patented in 1912 by Merck as a precursor for a new medication to stop abnormal bleeding. It was later tried as a diet pill and in the 70's gained popularity among psycho-therapists who felt that it made their patients be honest with themselves and more receptive - an absolute requirement of successful theraby.

It was mainly because of the recreational use of its sisters MDA and MDE that it was put on the schedule for banned substances in the 80's and despite a very co-ordinated effort by many Western governments in the 90's, there was not a single conclusive research or report that showed any long-term adverse effects.

After much ado about nothing, MDMA is now being researched in 6 or 7 countries including the US, as an effective treatment for PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder), depression and anxiety. Also noteworthy, the chief executive of the UK Medical Research Council stated that MDMA is "on the bottom of the scale of harm," and was rated to be of lesser concern than alcohol, tobacco, and cannabis, as well as several classes of prescription medications, when examining the harmfulness of twenty popular recreational drugs.

So, should a substance like that be sold in a corner store or without a prescription? Absolutely not. Should we the citizens be given the choice by a doctor to try one dose of MDMA or a 3 month prescrition of highly addictive sleeping pills and anti-depressants? The choice WAS and will always be clear to me, if I'm ever put in the same situation again.

And I think the word "recreational" tends to be misleading on these topics and completely shifts focus from the spiritual aspect of these substances. Whether we're talkin about the ancient Haoma (as mentioned in Avestan texts) or the South American Ayahuasca, or the native Indian Peyote or just plain old magic mushrooms, there is a world of new visions and undiscovered perspectives that remain to be opened for all individuals IMHO. Should we run out and hand this stuff out in the streets for people to try them, of course not. But should we make these experiences available and within reach for those who are interested, willing and ready to try them?

The answer to that IMHO lies in the value we give to personal choise and freedom. It's always better to educate people and show them the responsible use of a substance, than to throw them to the wolves in an uncontrolled and dirty underground market. Because those who are interested to find these substances will find them and they may very well be our kids at some point. So, do we want them to have the option of receiving a substance through a doctor and after consulation with us, or from the drug dealer who may also introduce them to crack?

I don't know... I have a tough time seeing how the 2nd alternative is the better one.

Kazem jaan, if i hadn't gone to hishschool in the states and if i hadn't seen the extreme stupidity of American teenagers when it comes to taking it too far, i would be for leagalizing all recreational drugs.

But making it more readily available to the general public will mean that more and more kids will be able to get their hands on it. Levels of abuse will skyrocket.

Practically speaking, if Americas Southern border is finally controlled somehow, the war on drugs will be pretty much over.

Not sure Ramin jan. You'd have to see how it is legalised and in what ways someone may purchase it. As Kaesra illustrates how it is in Holland; will there be limits per day and person? Age limit? Who knows.

I believe if a person is going to screw themselves rotten, they'll do it legally or otherwise. And in this current situation, those people will have to deal with underhanded people who just WANT to get them hooked and who are in general a bad influence (gangs, pushers, etc). They also mix/match and give bad product which is even more dangerous. And as silly as it sounds, at least there may be some quality control. I think the statistics show, as Paul puts it, that less people seem to want it when it is legalised. I don't know if that's a social aspect, wherein people may be less attracted to things they are allowed to have.

Not sure Ramin jan. You'd have to see how it is legalised and in what ways someone may purchase it. As Kaesra illustrates how it is in Holland; will there be limits per day and person? Age limit? Who knows.

I believe if a person is going to screw themselves rotten, they'll do it legally or otherwise. And in this current situation, those people will have to deal with underhanded people who just WANT to get them hooked and who are in general a bad influence (gangs, pushers, etc). They also mix/match and give bad product which is even more dangerous. And as silly as it sounds, at least there may be some quality control. I think the statistics show, as Paul puts it, that less people seem to want it when it is legalised. I don't know if that's a social aspect, wherein people may be less attracted to things they are allowed to have.

Well, the bolded part is a key point. I do think that most people can and would be able to be mature about using such substances, but like i said, its the teenagers and pre teens that i'm worried about.

Just do a google search about drug abuse among teens in the US (something i've spent time studying) and see what you get. I've experienced it first hand but even i didn't know how bad it was. And this is with it being illegal, and in some cases hard to get hands on.

Well, the bolded part is a key point. I do think that most people can and would be able to be mature about using such substances, but like i said, its the teenagers and pre teens that i'm worried about.

Just do a google search about drug abuse among teens in the US (something i've spent time studying) and see what you get. I've experienced it first hand but even i didn't know how bad it was. And this is with it being illegal, and in some cases hard to get hands on.

Yeah, that's the whole issue Ramin jaan. Once you legalize it, then you have control over it, you generate taxes from it and you get rid of the guns and gangs that go with the whole trade. When you push it underground it's out of your control and everyone and anyone can get it.

I mean Ontario is a perfect example of this. You can't buy liquor or cigarettes here until you're 19 years old, but every 15 year old high school kid has easy access to weed and a rianbow of all drugs known to man. The same kid has to jump through hoops to buy cigarettes and alcohol. I just don't think prohibition has ever been the answer.

The same is true of people who come from Iran. Have you noticed the ones that drink, drink like a fish? If you want to do something IMHO, the more people hold you back, the more you'd want to do it (i.e. you'll be irresponsible about it). I think the answer lies in making people be more responsible for their actions and lives, rather than already drilling it into their heads that they're not responsible. 'Cause at that point, if and when they do get a hold of what they want, they're preconditioned to be irresponsible.

But Behrou jaan here its much easier for a teenager to get his hands on some alcohol then it is to get his hands on an 8 ball.

BTW, you were supposed to take the day off, so get the hell out of here. I don't want to see you here the rest of the day. I'll ban you if I have to. :Deviltype: :D

Kazem jaan, if i hadn't gone to hishschool in the states and if i hadn't seen the extreme stupidity of American teenagers when it comes to taking it too far, i would be for leagalizing all recreational drugs.

But making it more readily available to the general public will mean that more and more kids will be able to get their hands on it. Levels of abuse will skyrocket.

Practically speaking, if Americas Southern border is finally controlled somehow, the war on drugs will be pretty much over.


Apart of that, the effects and damages of Marijuana are much more severe than that of say alcohol or cigarettes. Pot leads to mental addiction and it really makes people slow and kills brain cells. If you drink one glass of wine your whole life every night, not much will happen to you. If you smoke on cigarette every day you might be addicted to it but nothing will really happen to you. If you smoke a joint every day, you are slow and brain dead by the age of 40. You just need to look at pot smokers.

Ridiculous idea!

But Behrou jaan here its much easier for a teenager to get his hands on some alcohol then it is to get his hands on an 8 ball.

BTW, you were supposed to take the day off, so get the hell out of here. I don't want to see you here the rest of the day. I'll ban you if I have to. :Deviltype: :D

LOL. I could not stay away, but I promiss it was only in between doing the rest of my stuff. :dancing1:

Well yeah, I'd agree with your assessment that it's easier for teenagers to get alcohol than an 8 ball. But, that's because there really isn't a big market for teenagers and coke to begin with - so without the demand to support it (primarily due to the high cost), there's no supply. And cocaine is a drug I will personally never ever support being legalized (despite the great leaps Freud and modern psychology made on it ;))

But comparing alcohol and weed and at least in Ontario, I assure you that can you get weed in any high scool (public or private) within 2 hours of asking around., while there's abslutely no way in hell you'll have a bottle of Vodka or pack of smokes in that time! It makes no sense for a dealer to go and buy a pack of smokes or a bottle of liquor to resell it - while he is really the only source for weed.

I was so sheltered from this kind of stuff, I never even knew anyone in my high school that was smoking weed, let alone what an 8 ball was! But that was in the 80's and things have changed so much in Canadian high schools. Its a zoo out there!


Apart of that, the effects and damages of Marijuana are much more severe than that of say alcohol or cigarettes. Pot leads to mental addiction and it really makes people slow and kills brain cells.

AS jaan, most studies have actually proven otherwise, that weed is less harmful than alcohol and tobacco and has a MUCH lower cost to society in the long run. You smoke half a pack a day from the time you're 19 and your chances of developing Cancer are pretty high. You smoke one joint a day and you've done much less damage to your body and those around you (i.e. in terms of second hand smoke). Also, how many people die each year because of "stoned" driving?!

Now, that doesn't mean I don't agree with you about the effects of weed. I personally do think it makes people slow and less active (through its relase of Dopamine) - lazy if you will - and often discouraged because one can come up with great thoughts and ideas which are often not backed up by any action. But, honestly if you had a choice being around a friend who is drunk and one who is stoned, which one would you pick?

But, honestly if you had a choice being around a friend who is drunk and one who is stoned, which one would you pick?

TBH, drunk. I prefer drunk people over stoned ones. Both are annoying but I will take a drunk person on any given day.

If we want to talk about studies, there are also many studies on the effects of Marijuana on psychosis and schizophrenia

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/01/health/main2746434.shtml

http://www.schizophrenia.com/sznews/archives/001475.html

Since I have worked in a mental health hospital, I can assure that from experience.

TBH, drunk. I prefer drunk people over stoned ones. Both are annoying but I will take a drunk person on any given day.

If we want to talk about studies, there are also many studies on the effects of Marijuana on psychosis and schizophrenia

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/01/health/main2746434.shtml

http://www.schizophrenia.com/sznews/archives/001475.html

Since I have worked in a mental health hospital, I can assure that from experience.

Are you serious? That's really interesting that you said that. I always thought it was a no contest between the two, but I guess I stand to be corrected.

LOL @ the first report. I can't believe they wasted British tax payers money to conclude that THC triggers hallucinations and paranoid dellusions! For the love of God, all they had to do was spend a few bucks and smoke a couple of joints to come to that conclusion - or at most spend $1000 to interview 20 pot smokers! These researchers really crack me up sometimes spending so much time and money to state the obvious! :drinking05:

A research worthy of publication IMHO would have attempted to examine the underlying cause of that paranoia that gets triggered by THC. In essence THC is only making the person aware of the paranoia that is already there (that's what the research concluded!). And if paranoia is a problem, is it not better to become aware of it and deal with it as you would with a tumour than continuously allow your frontal cortex to suppress it until you die of a brain-stroke or a heart-attack?!

What are your thoughts on that?

Yes. His stance is legalisation of all drugs, I believe. He's been arguing this for decades. Paul is what you would call unique: a politician with a spine and integrity.

Well that's why he didn't have a chance in hell of going anywhere close to becoming elected president :)



I believe if a person is going to screw themselves rotten, they'll do it legally or otherwise. And in this current situation, those people will have to deal with underhanded people who just WANT to get them hooked and who are in general a bad influence (gangs, pushers, etc). They also mix/match and give bad product which is even more dangerous. And as silly as it sounds, at least there may be some quality control. I think the statistics show, as Paul puts it, that less people seem to want it when it is legalised. I don't know if that's a social aspect, wherein people may be less attracted to things they are allowed to have.

For me too the bold part is the main issue and I totally agree. Legalisation takes the power away from drug dealers who are milking it for all they can. I was a warden at Univerity Halls of Residence for a few years and saw so many people smoking and you could never stop it even if you took harsh disciplinary action. They'd do it again and again and would never tell you where they got it from. But someone always made money from this.

Apart of that, the effects and damages of Marijuana are much more severe than that of say alcohol or cigarettes. Pot leads to mental addiction and it really makes people slow and kills brain cells. If you drink one glass of wine your whole life every night, not much will happen to you. If you smoke on cigarette every day you might be addicted to it but nothing will really happen to you. If you smoke a joint every day, you are slow and brain dead by the age of 40. You just need to look at pot smokers.

Ridiculous idea!

Well, the difference is that with alcohol you could become addicted and with cigarettes, the fact is you could never just do one a day. Once you start you do more and more until you are a real addict. Whoever says they can do one cig a day and stop at that is kidding themselves and you. And we all know the damage cigarettes can cause to one's health over time.

A research worthy of publication IMHO would have attempted to examine the underlying cause of that paranoia that gets triggered by THC. In essence THC is only making the person aware of the paranoia that is already there (that's what the research concluded!). And if paranoia is a problem, is it not better to become aware of it and deal with it as you would with a tumour than continuously allow your frontal cortex to suppress it until you die of a brain-stroke or a heart-attack?!

What are your thoughts on that?


Schizophrenia and psychosis are at times genetically inherited. Not always but sometimes.

http://www.schizophrenia.com/research/hereditygen.htm

As an example, if your grandfather or anyone else in your family was schizophrenic or had psychosis, there's a good chance that you can have it too. It might never come up but smoking pot makes it more likely to happen.
That's why, as said before, pot is not the harmless recreational drug that is made people to believe it is.

Oh, I definitely agree with you on that my good man. Neither pot, nor Alcohol, tobacco, aspirin, sleeping pills, anti-depressants, Viagara, or even tea, coffeee or chocolate are "harmless" per say.

And you are correct in that use of pot increases the likelihood of schizophrenic episodes - but you'd be surprised to know that Cannabis is still behind alcohol by a factor of 1 to 4 in that category (http://www.schizophrenia.com/prevention/streetdrugs.html). So, that fact alone IMHO, does not justify in any way why Cannabis should not be legalized, while alcohol is sold in corner stores.

BTW, I've really liked the way you have presented your points so far with links and reference and do look forward to your rebuttal.

I am against. I do smoke cigeret. I cann't think of a better way to give up than illegalizing it.